Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 02.07.2025 03:36
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
One Risk Of White Wine You’ve Never Heard Of, Research Reveals - MindBodyGreen
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
From 1 to 10, how dark is the Naruto fandom? Why?
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Let’s just make it real clear:
Quia quia unde harum qui quas.
Just in the last 5 years:
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
SpaceX launches 23 Starlink satellites on Falcon 9 rocket from Cape Canaveral - Spaceflight Now
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
What’s next?
How Mark Walter’s billions could help the Lakers gain an edge on the court - Silver Screen and Roll
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Microsoft lays off hundreds of WA workers, weeks after companywide cuts - The Seattle Times
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Thank you.
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Kroger faces massive worker walkout, closed stores - TheStreet